Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-142"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.5.3-142"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
There are three reasons why we welcome the debate that has just been held in Parliament on the forthcoming enlargement of the European Union. First of all, it appears that, as of 2004, around 10 of the 12 candidate countries (with the likely exceptions of Romania and Bulgaria) may all join at the same time. The Members belonging to the
think that this is excellent news, which will allow us to make up for some lost time, after such a long wait.
The second reason is that we have remarked upon a change in tone when referring to the candidate countries, which are now treated like States that are worthy of respect. The resolution even stresses that the European Union must ensure that the dignity of the people of the candidate countries is never compromised by making inappropriate demands upon them. We had often condemned the haughty and even contemptuous attitude of the federalists, who demanded that the countries in the East relinquish their sovereignty. Let us hope that this new development will provide more than just a change in vocabulary.
Lastly, the third reason we welcome the debate is that paragraph 10 of the resolution appears to accept a more flexible Europe that is made up of various circles. In our view, this is a more realistic position, on the condition, however, that the circle in which France is placed is not dominated by ultra-federalism. This would allow flexibility for all countries, in return for increased rigidity for a sub-set, which would be illogical.
The resolution still contains, however, some unsatisfactory, even unacceptable paragraphs. For example, it is a contradiction to demand better monitoring of external borders of candidate countries as well as a relaxation of their asylum policy. It is hardly responsible to call for a structural policy to be applied to the whole of the European Union following enlargement, whereas we should instead focus the policy for a limited period on the new member countries. It is unacceptable to assert that the lesson to be learned from the Irish referendum is that we need to find a method of revising the treaties, which are likely to provoke such opposition (Recital E). It appears that the change in tone does not go as far as respect for national democracies that vote ‘no’!"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples